Dear Economist, either you have doubts that “A thief must stay in jail” or you know for sure that Khodorkovsky earned several billion dollars in few years without violation a law. In every article touching Russia you are defending Khodorkovsky without any evidence - just because The Economist has a setup regarding Russia: blame this country on every occasion. It's really boring.

For Russians the story is absolutely outdated, public opinion is against tycoons. All your fairy tales presenting Khodorkovsky as a hero opposing the system is your wishful thinking.

"In a crowd of hundreds" near the court there were more journalists and police than normal people. Article's photo of the crowd with a well readable slogan not in Russian, but in English is just an illusrtarion of what is this show about.

Wake up and tell the truth - Russians are in fact more concerned about the weather, airports and New Year holidays.

Good article, especially "The Kremlin has long flirted with nationalists, sponsoring thuggish youth groups such as Nashi (Ours), and allowing marches in Moscow. But this is the first time Mr Putin has exploited nationalist themes so blatantly. He has always used threatening events in Russia as an excuse to consolidate power."

Yes, Nashi and Molodaya Gvardiya get support for public demonstrations; democrats get arrested. Putin used "threatening events" before to ensure himself "victory" in Presidential Elections and will, surprise, surprise, do so again probably. Guy plays piano with one finger and thinks he is Mozart. Appears on TV once a year and drones on and on for almost 5 hours ala Fidel Castro without brooking any serious debate. Why cannot a Russian democrat like Kasparov get even 20 minutes on Russian T.V.? Ah, yes, the Czar would not approve.

On Khodorkovsky, never mind the man but there is a law of "double jeopardy" in the West's criminal law system. The issue is not so much Khodorkovsky but the complete inarbitrariness of the Russian legal system. Russians who wish to dance on Khodorkovsky's grave should at least remind themselves that this decision in the end will do them and their country's economy no good and terrify to hell potential foreign investors in Russia who rely on an independent judiciary to protect their investments. The judiciary is not independent in a Vertical Power Chekist regime.

Forget about dancing on Khodorkovsky's grave; any Russian truly interested in the country's well-being should make every effort to ensure there is a viable democratic candidate for the Presidential Elections in 2012 who believes in the rule of law. If not, it is back to "Long Live the Czar".

The other oligarchs are safe as long as they do not oppose Putin. Unless he deems it necessary to confiscate their assets and return them to state ownership where the apparatchik can siphon off the money, instead of the oligarchs.

Khodorkovsky is most likely guilty of the first set of charges, as would be all the other oligarchs and most other filthy rich Russians, including Putin, if they ever did forensic audits on them. But they can't have it both ways. If he was guilty of the first then he could not be guilty if the second except in the fantasy world that is Russian "justice".

Didomyk...where on the Black sea? The Black sea coastline is mostly Ukrainian.

Show me some corruption free sacred place; it is only question of degree of corruption. Former vice president Cheney is being presently litigated by Nigeria for shady deals while in White House. Madoff was even former chairman of NASDAQ stock market that supposed to safeguard the corruption there.

Russian corruption is amateurish and in diapers compared to the pros from the West that scarify even entire countries for the final benefit.

Writing about widespread corruption in Russia, - in politics, in the courts, in business - is not contemptible, tolerating it and contributing to it is indeed more than contemptible !!!

Many Russians openly talk and write about it realising that, if not checked and reversed, it will destroy the very roots of their society and further weaken the country. An example is an open letter by one Sergei Kolesnikov to president Medvedev informing him that a luxury palace, that will ultimately cost ONE Billion dollars, is supposedly being built on the Black Sea coast for the exclusive use of ...Vladimir Putin ! The letter also comments on a broad scale of Russian corruption and provides figures as estimated by Transparency International.

You can read the Russian text of the letter or its English translation here:

Instead of defending Mr Khodorkovsky The Economist should be asking why the other oligarchs of similar origin are not getting the same treatment.

And, by the way, forget worries about justice - the main reason behind the uproar generated in this case is the fact that several well-connected big boys in the US and in the UK got badly hurt with the seizing of Yukos by Rosneft. In other words, this entire thing hurt really in the pocket, not in the heart.

I love how The economist seeks to influence the people hinting what is "normal":just as nobody believed they were guilty of stealing oil and laundering the proceeds".I want to say to the article author that ,probably"nobody doesn't think that Khodorkovski and Platonov didn't steal and laundering the proceeds.Regarding Mr.Putin "inadmissible"intervention in the tribunal decision .i remember that Madoff who stole from rich people was,also,called "swindler","the greatest cheater of the century" before the judges found his guilt and recently a lot of American politicians as Sarah Palin,Biden demanded not less that Mr.Assange to be assassinated and others "more moderates" demanded hard punishments and all that before the beginning of the trail.

a really skewed and one-sided article...
Where are the objective evidences to suggest that Khodorkovsky is not guilty when it is already proven otherwise, and why is the West so sensitive about Khodorkovsky? What is their interest in the tycoon? These questions should also be analysed, rather than going on an offensive against a time tested leader with an anti-corruption stance like Putin.

It's very nice on your part to acknowledge this fact, except of course for our friendly neighbours in Turkey and Bulgaria. But please inform Putin and get him to withdraw Russian troops from the Abkhasian coast and get his rusty Black Sea navy out from the Black Sea altogether, let's say, to somewhere around Murmansk and Archangel.

As to Madoff and his corrupt associates you will need to consult with Joe the Infant Joye who happens to have inside knowledge in most matters pertaining to his brotherhood.

While the US oligarchs who wrecked so much more havoc keep getting state funds and give each other large 'market determined' bonuses for the hard task of wrecking the world economy and bankrupting millions of americans.

The insider privatization scam artists of Russia are either exiled or in a jail in Siberia...

The only way Khodorkovsky could have stlen from his own Company is if he was not reallly the owner but just a puppet of the real owners of Yukos. Otherwise it does not make sense at all. Then it makes sense why he is the only oligarch put behind bars and explains Putin's statement that he is a tief.

Anaxzgoras wrote: "Hats off to you Inter-nationalist, for showing us all that audacity knows no limits... And as blake said, Khodorkorvsky the man aside, the legal system is on trial. Khodor should be tried in the future in a real court of LAW for his actual crimes...."

Right on target. My only 'amendment' would be that Khodorkvsky and his former Yukos associates should be tried in a real Court of LAW, a court not controlled by Putin and his associates.

@ Inter-nationalist - one small favour, could you post a screenshot of your Nashi ID? It's just I've always been curious, genuinely, what it looks like. Please consult with your C.O./superrior and get back to me. I would be much obliged.

@ Pikipapina - muppets like Palin can call for anything really, difference is the state as a RATIONAL entity ignores the muppets and doesn't actually act on it... and Palin, or Glen Beck or others you imply are just about as moderate in the US as Zhirik is in Russia...

and btw Internationalist, the west's interest in Khodorkovsky is curious. I mean it could be the issue of a puppet legal system? Alghough it's probably not that - as we both know right? I could be off here, but if I had to bet money on it, I would say that Khodorkovsky is probably just a US Military cyborg sent to Russia from the future to rob and plunder and eventually eliminate the "time tested leader with an anti-corruption stance". I think we can both agree right?

Hats off to you Inter-nationalist, for showing us all that audacity knows no limits... And as blake said, Khodorkorvsky the man aside, the legal system is on trial. Khodor should be tried in the future in a real court of LAW for his actual crimes, and taking into account the sentence already served.

Khodorkovsky and the other robber-barons of the Yeltsin era were given fair warning by Putin that if they wanted to keep their ill-gotten gains they should stay out of politics, and an assurance that if they did the latter they could do the former. What motivated them to spurn the deal? I find it a little hard to believe that they imagined Western liberal-democratic ideology to be the guiding principle of post-Communist Russia; it is hard to see how anyone as naïve as that could have made so much money. Or did they imagine that, having bought the 1996 election, when (with much US help, openly boasted of in Time magazine) they thwarted the Communist Party's impending victory, they could continue to play that game for ever? If so, they badly underestimated their opponent.

@ Blake - "On Khodorkovsky, never mind the man but there is a law of "double jeopardy" in the West's criminal law system. The issue is not so much Khodorkovsky but the complete inarbitrariness of the Russian legal system". - True. Like in that story where "they came for the Communists one day, I said nothing, as I wasn't a Communist. The next day they came for the Fascists, I said nothing, as I wasn't a Fascist. The next day they came for (many others). Then one day they came for me, and nobody said anything, as there wasn't anybody else left". So I agree, rule of law should be the basic principle anywhere.

@ Dido - I heard there was a similar story in St. Petersburg, that a palace or residence worth close to a billion $ was offered by a group of 'businessmen' to Putin personally. But I'm foggy on the details though.

What is sickening is that any condemnation of Russia's lack of a justice code by the West is very muted, Russia has to made aware that if it continues down this path, then the Leaders such as Putin and the rest of his clique must be refused any permit to travel abroad, and any bank accounts and property must be siezed untill a reasonable acount has been given on how they were aquired in the first place.

@ Vishnu - You do realise that in the US you can't blame the bankers as such. What you're talking about is the the entire banking SYSTEM. The bankers who did all that abra-cadabra stuff with money were only operating within the legal system that allows them to do this. So if you want to blame anyone, blame the government. Then take the time to understand how the whole system works, and then decide for yourself who you want to vote for at the next election...

Blaming the bankers is redundant, and pointless. They are a consequence of a silly financial system, not the cause of it. If people would think more for themselves and not believe in 'free money' then none of this would have happened either... so you can't just blame them.

And btw "good work Putin and co" - Russian thieves who stole their money and then created phony 'banks' etc. were ALSO bailed out by the Russian taxpayers... so yeah well done - because it's brilliant. Rob the people to acquire insane ammounts of money and then ask those same people to PAY so that you can keep your stolen fortune.